(A Committee of Correspondence)

12 August 2012

Hillary Clinton's war.

"At a news conference here, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, said that with the situation in Syria growing more dire — as the battle for Aleppo continues to rage — it was time to create a nerve center for information sharing and planning. They said a unified task force with intelligence, military and political leaders from both countries would be formed immediately to track Syria’s present and plan for its future." NY Times

---------------------------------

There are a number of odd things in the BHO Administration's conduct of its unconcealed war against the Syrian government:

- The US and Turkish government are creating a coordination center in which to work with the Syrian rebels for the overthrow of Syria's government. There is no UN resolution or other sanction in international law for this effort to depose a sovereign government that is a member of the United Nations. What is the legal basis for this action within American law? Is it a presidential finding under the National Defense Act? If it is, then we should consider the fact that such a "finding" authorizes a covert action without benefit of congressional agreement. Has the president of the United States now assumed the right and power to issue a personal decree that a foreign government should be overthrown? If that is the case, then any government, anywhere, would be a possible future target for any future US Administration.

- Why is the State Department leading in the conduct of this war? Does this strange situation reflect a dvision of opinion withing the Executive Branch? Do Panetta, the JCS and the CIA agree with what is being done or is HC leading the way because she and her allies among the neo-Wilsonians and neocons are the "pro" faction in such an argument?

- What is BHO's actual position in this matter? Is he so pre-occupied with the election in November that he is no longer really in charge?

- What is the US intelligence community telling the WH about the composition and nature of the Syrian rebel groups? On FNS today McCain told the world that AQ is increasingly present in Syria. He must have gotten that from the IC. What else is the IC saying about the rebels? Personally, i preferred Ed Harris as John McCain. The Democrats should ask Clapper, Petraeus and Flynn the hard questions in open hearings.

- What is the IC (particularly DIA) telling the WH about the actual course of the civil war in Syria? Has the message soaked in that the rebels are on the verge of defeat? If they lose in Aleppo, then their "sanctuaries" along the Turkish border will become vulnerable. Is that why there is now talk of a "no fly zone" over those parts of Syria. Will that be followed by a "no drive" zone? Such zones would require direct combat operations on the part of US and Turkish forces. Which US law would authorize that? pl

Comments

Hillary Clinton's war.

"At a news conference here, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Turkey’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, said that with the situation in Syria growing more dire — as the battle for Aleppo continues to rage — it was time to create a nerve center for information sharing and planning. They said a unified task force with intelligence, military and political leaders from both countries would be formed immediately to track Syria’s present and plan for its future." NY Times

---------------------------------

There are a number of odd things in the BHO Administration's conduct of its unconcealed war against the Syrian government:

- The US and Turkish government are creating a coordination center in which to work with the Syrian rebels for the overthrow of Syria's government. There is no UN resolution or other sanction in international law for this effort to depose a sovereign government that is a member of the United Nations. What is the legal basis for this action within American law? Is it a presidential finding under the National Defense Act? If it is, then we should consider the fact that such a "finding" authorizes a covert action without benefit of congressional agreement. Has the president of the United States now assumed the right and power to issue a personal decree that a foreign government should be overthrown? If that is the case, then any government, anywhere, would be a possible future target for any future US Administration.

- Why is the State Department leading in the conduct of this war? Does this strange situation reflect a dvision of opinion withing the Executive Branch? Do Panetta, the JCS and the CIA agree with what is being done or is HC leading the way because she and her allies among the neo-Wilsonians and neocons are the "pro" faction in such an argument?

- What is BHO's actual position in this matter? Is he so pre-occupied with the election in November that he is no longer really in charge?

- What is the US intelligence community telling the WH about the composition and nature of the Syrian rebel groups? On FNS today McCain told the world that AQ is increasingly present in Syria. He must have gotten that from the IC. What else is the IC saying about the rebels? Personally, i preferred Ed Harris as John McCain. The Democrats should ask Clapper, Petraeus and Flynn the hard questions in open hearings.

- What is the IC (particularly DIA) telling the WH about the actual course of the civil war in Syria? Has the message soaked in that the rebels are on the verge of defeat? If they lose in Aleppo, then their "sanctuaries" along the Turkish border will become vulnerable. Is that why there is now talk of a "no fly zone" over those parts of Syria. Will that be followed by a "no drive" zone? Such zones would require direct combat operations on the part of US and Turkish forces. Which US law would authorize that? pl